Yes, but you see Draymond can actually shoot a little bit. He's over 30% on threes for his career. Simmons has never made a 3-pointer in the NBA!
I think that is something you would have to be willing to live with. If there was a forward with close to his skill set (aggressive playmaker) who had an outside shot that would be great, but I don't know of any that would be realistic targets. Things will be different when we have our passing/defending center back for sure, but the one thing the Blazers completely lack, is an aggressive playmaker who can push the ball up the court. Dame just doesn't do it very often. If we had one, then I think it would let Dame and CJ/Simons focus more on shooting. Just watching the W's play this series made me envious of an aggressive playmaker. I assume that is what ET was supposed to be, but just didn't work that way.
Okay, but he'd be taking Harkless' spot, so it's not like we'd be losing out on shooting from the SF position. We'd certainly have to make up for CJ's shooting (if he's traded), and that's easier said than done. But it sounds like Ant can really shoot, so that drop-off is potentially negligible.
Yeah, ET is definitely a problem no matter how you slice it. But the problem goes well beyond him - we simply do not have an aggressive offense. Nearly all of our passing occurs between players outside the 3-point arc. Can Terry figure out a way to use Simmons' as an attacking ball-handler? I have serious doubts.
I heard the Bill Simmons podcast and I couldn't believe they were saying CJ was too valuable. That's insane. I think it's an absolute no-brainer to trade Simmons for CJ if we get the chance. Just imagine how many open looks that offense would create. Get a guy like Rodney Hood for SG and you've got a really good defensive team. Hopefully Zach Collins continues to develop his three point shot. But suppose you don't get brilliant 3 and D guys to surround Nurk/Simmons/Zach/Dame. Settle for three point shooters with mediocre defense. The paint will be completely shut down anyway. If Nurk never comes back and Zach never evolves, you are still trading a 27 year old star for a 22 year old star. You've got forever to figure out how to make it work.
Didn't you watch the last series? We passed it in the paint and into the paint to the Warriors very consistently. I'm really hoping a lineup change next year (insert Collins), will cause them to get back to moving the ball through the post or high post more. Both Collins and Biebs are decent passers, while not as good as Nurk, but they could run the offense that way and then be set when Nurk returns.
If by "passed it in the paint" you meant "passed it to the Warriors in the paint", then yeah - we did a great job doing that!
Glad I'm not the only one who thinks this. Simmons is 22. People are saying his value is down, but he still put up a 20 PER and 17-9-8 without any semblance of a jumpshot
aint no way Simmons is going anywhere. He's probably more valuable to the Sixers than can't-play-all-the-games-cuz-I'm-soft Embiid. Joel is a trainwreck IMHO. He is so close to a career ending injury in the off-season while on vacation it's not even funny, just because he's stupid when it comes to health. The guy will practice in Ugg slippers for fux sake.
For that to happen you need some sign and trades from the Sixers and either Tobias or Jimmy to leave. And if one of them leaves i cannot see how it's likely they trade their other star for CJ. It's a no-brainer yes for us and a no-brainer no for them.
And yet look at what Brand has done since taking over. He is clearly building around Embiid and going for it because he sees their championship window as NOW. Embiid might be sidelined and out of the league in three years. Simmons isn't there yet, which is why a CJ for Simmons idea is even remotely feasible.
I want Simmons and Boban. After seeing John Wick 3, definitely wouldn't take on Simmons with Boban being included. ;-) In reality, Simmons would probably be more obtainable if Sixers had a contract they wanted to dump. I don't see that they do, so it is possible, but highly unlikely unless they really wanted one of our rooks or some future picks.
Pain? Lol, speaking for myself here, but anything after the OKC series was icing. As the Denver series went on I got more annoyed, but that was mainly because of their fanbase. Didn’t care too much about the Warriors series. I’m ok with losing to a superior team, especially when Portland’s X factor against them is injured.
More I think about it the more I think Hood, Kanter, and Curry will all walk. I think Hood and Kanter priced themselves out of our budget. As for Curry, I don’t think we’re going to be desperate enough to bring him back. I also don’t believe he enjoyed his role enough to stay either. The AD idea is interesting. With the Pelicans rebuilding, their owners reported disdain with the Lakers, and Olsheys relationship with Griffin, I can see a match between the two teams. Simons and Collins is a nice starting point. As mentioned before, Collins is a nice fit next to Zion, and Simons gives them a long term PG. Matching salaries with expirings should appeal to them as well. Throw in a first or two and I could see it happening. We’d of course be banking on AD staying, but the culture is there for a reason. Trust it.
Nice to think about, but Collins didn't improve his stock that much. Simons and Collins isn't going to beat Boston's offer. CJ + Simons + Collins + picks and taking on extra salary might keep them on the phone. But they have no use for CJ so they'd have to find a third team.
he absolutely did, but not to the level you're projecting. He isn't landing you AD as the major piece, come on man. The Kyrie point is interesting. But what if Boston can land Conley?
